HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submitlogin

Is the need for "pretty large breakthroughs" based on realistic calculations, or are you just guessing? I know that most people subscribe to your position, but I can't say I've really seen convincing analyses that show the numbers:

- What thresholds of $/kWh, charge speed, power density etc. do we need to reach before scaling becomes viable? What are those thresholds based on?

- Where are we now on those metrics, and how did they evolve over the last 2-3 decades?

People seem to forget that we've already been making pretty huge breakthroughs in storage for decades: https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline

Still, everyone seems very confident that scaling is non-viable now. But IMO it should be possible to demonstrate the non-viability using the approach above - even if the exact numbers are wrong, the orders of magnitude should be good enough, right?

help



> Is the need for "pretty large breakthroughs" based on realistic calculations, or are you just guessing?

I'm just guessing. But absent some kind of path to get there, I'd prefer to plan for needing to cover this situation with nuclear or other storage (I feel like pumped storage may make sense, but again haven't done the numbers).

Like, if you're correct then we'll end up with lots of power we don't really need. That's great, as we can use it to decarbonise other parts of the economy, however, if I'm correct and we dont build some kind of baseload/storage solution then we'll be in trouble in the winters, which I really want to avoid.


If you're correct, we'll end up with tons of extra power, since the nuclear plants would have to cover everything on their own anyway! But it would also take unbelievable amounts of money, and thus delay the energy transition by decades. We don't have that much time left.

Instead of guessing, maybe it's worth looking into the numbers?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: